The upcoming thing is low-cost, low-power and small servers running on ARM's chip architecture. Microsoft needed some sort of version of Windows that can run on ARM. Even if the consumer side of the business is not successful, it sets them up for the future on the server side.

Or, in other words - it's not all about the crap you can hold in your hands that you bought at Best Buy.

The way I hear it, this is exactly what Microsoft wanted anyway. One of the reasons for providing ARM support would be to give Intel a good reason to innovate and reduce the cost of their chips or add performance. If Intel really pulls it off, it will give people a reason to innovate the ARM processors.

The reason people buy Windows is because it's "good enough" for the price they want. They know this. If they can drive down the cost of cheap computers, every single cheap computer is going to have a Windows license on it. They make money in volume, and they promote volume by driving down the cost of new computers.

The upcoming thing is low-cost, low-power and small servers running on ARM's chip architecture. Microsoft needed some sort of version of Windows that can run on ARM. Even if the consumer side of the business is not successful, it sets them up for the future on the server side.

Or, in other words - it's not all about the crap you can hold in your hands that you bought at Best Buy.

This. RT is a way to defray some of the cost of Windows on ARM, which is a strategic investment for Microsoft.

Even if Intel can fix their low-power chip train wreck, MS is still going to be interested in ARM, because no company wants to be that tightly coupled with a single partner.

Intrepid00:Unlike previous versions of Windows Phone before 8 they are upgradeable now since they use the NT kernel.

Not so much. The Windows Phone side of things is still derived and built primarily from CE. Whilst it may have a lot of features similar to it's big brothers it has little to nothing in common with them on a code level.

But you are in all probability correct there will be a Windows Phone 8.1 released around the same time as the service pack for 8 appear but beyond that... not so much.

Ignore their press releases, the marketing bunnies don't know what they're talking about; they used to say each release was a 'total rewrite' until the GDI bug slammed every version of Windows after all.

Vaneshi:I mean it's just sensible to have a working escape hatch should your vendor go full retard.

The problem is that Microsoft is the only company that offers a fully-functional directory system. Regardless of what you think of their other products, the centralized management and fine-grained control you get with AD and Group Policy in Windows Server and the Professional versions of the desktop OS is simply worlds away from anything else out there, especially considering it's a standard feature you don't have to pay extra for.

Vaneshi:Intrepid00: Unlike previous versions of Windows Phone before 8 they are upgradeable now since they use the NT kernel.

Not so much. The Windows Phone side of things is still derived and built primarily from CE. Whilst it may have a lot of features similar to it's big brothers it has little to nothing in common with them on a code level.

But you are in all probability correct there will be a Windows Phone 8.1 released around the same time as the service pack for 8 appear but beyond that... not so much.

Ignore their press releases, the marketing bunnies don't know what they're talking about; they used to say each release was a 'total rewrite' until the GDI bug slammed every version of Windows after all.

RexTalionis:Vaneshi: Intrepid00: Unlike previous versions of Windows Phone before 8 they are upgradeable now since they use the NT kernel.

Not so much. The Windows Phone side of things is still derived and built primarily from CE. Whilst it may have a lot of features similar to it's big brothers it has little to nothing in common with them on a code level.

But you are in all probability correct there will be a Windows Phone 8.1 released around the same time as the service pack for 8 appear but beyond that... not so much.

Ignore their press releases, the marketing bunnies don't know what they're talking about; they used to say each release was a 'total rewrite' until the GDI bug slammed every version of Windows after all.

Do you enjoy being wrong?

Windows Phone 8 is built from the NT kernel, not the CE kernel.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/06/windows-nt-coming-to-phones-w it h-windows-phone-8/

Between this and your previous claim that Windows Blue was going to be Windows 9 and that it would be a paid upgrade, I don't think you know what you are talking about.

If they stopped giving it away it would defeat 90% of the entire purpose of Windows Server, so I'm not sure how that would even play out.

Regardless, it's not the gold standard because it's "free", it's the gold standard because it's the best by leaps and bounds. There are other LDAP systems out there, but they're nothing compared to AD and when it comes to large installations, forget it, the ONLY realistic option is System Center because nobody else even tries.

Vaneshi:Not so much. The Windows Phone side of things is still derived and built primarily from CE. Whilst it may have a lot of features similar to it's big brothers it has little to nothing in common with them on a code level.

Ummm... no it's not. Windows Phone 7 was built around the CE kernel, but 8 is built around the NT kernel.

I love that TFA used the term "Chipzilla" to refer to Intel. I was at a meeting years ago, and one of their VPs held up a t shirt with a Far Side-esque Godzilla and the caption "Chipzilla." Just the idea of the shirt caused him to start cracking up in front of about 1000 of us. I wish I had a clip of his awkward laugh, it was classic.

Intel has more suitable chips for a low power low cost tablet than the ultra-low voltage Core i3. The new Atom chips are neck and neck with ARM designs when it comes to both raw performance and performance-per-watt, and Intel recently announced their ultra-ultra-low power x86 compatible Quark line.

I can understand MS wanting to cover their bases, but I see Intel starting to grab more and more of the low power pie in the future. None of the ARM licensees can match Intel when it comes to process shrinks or manufacturing capability, and Intel can afford to cut margins to gain market share here.

I have a Surface RT. One thing that almost every tech site out there hasn't recognized that MS has done an awesome job with regular, monthly updates to both the software and firmware of the device. It performs much faster today than when it launched. The $350 device does a nice job of taking care of 90% of my computing needs.

That said, I'll look forward to version 2 - since the last 10% of my needs, raw file photo editing, gets quite pokey with the current ARM chip.

MrSteve007:I have a Surface RT. One thing that almost every tech site out there hasn't recognized that MS has done an awesome job with regular, monthly updates to both the software and firmware of the device. It performs much faster today than when it launched. The $350 device does a nice job of taking care of 90% of my computing needs.

That said, I'll look forward to version 2 - since the last 10% of my needs, raw file photo editing, gets quite pokey with the current ARM chip.

I don't claim to be an expert, but when I upgraded to a DSLR camera that supported RAW, I found that the biggest bottleneck for editing RAW was how much RAM I had, not my CPU speed. I upgraded my workstation from 4GB of RAM to 20GB, and RAW processing became orders of magnitude faster.

RottNDude:Wait until they sucker Ford or someone into using this for their "Infotainment" system... if they haven't already.

It would be an improvement. Ford's current system runs on a Windows CE based platform. It's very full featured, but a bit slow to respond. Windows RT could be great as a car interface - the entire system is designed around touch, the GUI is clear and easy to understand, and with the right hardware it's very responsive.

The biatching about Windows 8 and Windows RT mainly comes from people working or wanting to work in a traditional desktop environment. For a touch based environment, it's awesome.

In the current iteration of Surface RT, they did a piss poor job of explaining that Windows RT can only run Metro apps and not legacy apps from third party software vendors. Consumers returned Surface RT devices in droves when they discovered this.

Complete failure to explain what your product even is, Microsoft.

So to fix this, they have come up with the genius idea of just removing RT from the name of the product and calling it Surface 2, which I'm sure nobody will confuse with Surface 2 Pro.

BullBearMS:In the current iteration of Surface RT, they did a piss poor job of explaining that Windows RT can only run Metro apps and not legacy apps from third party software vendors. Consumers returned Surface RT devices in droves when they discovered this.

Reminds me of the problem Wal-Mart had when the sold Lindows PCs and customers discovered they could only run a small subset of Windows programs, they returned them like crazy. It's another case of Microsoft's marketing department using a bazooka to shoot the company in the foot.

That said, I have a Windows 8 tablet and it's great. Windows 8 is also running on my desktop with a dual monitor setup, one of which is a touchscreen but the experience there is nowhere as good as on the tablet so I tend to go mostly desktop on that machine.

EngineerAU:Reminds me of the problem Wal-Mart had when the sold Lindows PCs and customers discovered they could only run a small subset of Windows programs, they returned them like crazy. It's another case of Microsoft's marketing department using a bazooka to shoot the company in the foot.

To be fair, Lindows was a third-party product (specifically, a Linux distribution with Wine pre-configured), and Microsoft ended up suing the company for trademark infringement. It's now known as "Linspire", and last I heard it hasn't taken off at all.

Babwa Wawa:But it's the best by leaps and bounds because no other company will invest in the considerable engineering effort in a competing product, because they'll have to give it away for free.

If they have to give it away for free that implies that it's only of equal or inferior quality. If they could make something superior and did they could sell it because it would be worth more by virtue of being a better product.

Sooo.... you're still saying AD is the best quality option and nobody could do better. I don't get your point.

skozlaw:Sooo.... you're still saying AD is the best quality option and nobody could do better has invested to do better.

That's what I'm saying. Microsoft has set the market price for good directory services to zero, so there's no competition. If they started breaking it out and charging for it separately, you'd quickly see competitors in adjacent spaces closing the feature gaps.

anfrind:I don't claim to be an expert, but when I upgraded to a DSLR camera that supported RAW, I found that the biggest bottleneck for editing RAW was how much RAM I had, not my CPU speed. I upgraded my workstation from 4GB of RAM to 20GB, and RAW processing became orders of magnitude faster.

Oh, I agree that more RAM would also help, but we're talking about an ARM based machine. I'd open the task manager and watch the CPU be pegged at 100% for very long periods. Multitasking by running Xbox music & browsing the web at the same time slows things down quite a bit too. But again, it is a $350 device that weighs a 1 1/2 pounds and gets 8 hour battery life - so it can't have everything.

Also, a very little touted aspect is that Windows RT has yet to be any trojans/viruses on the market that'll fark with the OS. It's a perfect device to browse anything and everything on the web. A pron machine, if you will.

MrSteve007:anfrind: I don't claim to be an expert, but when I upgraded to a DSLR camera that supported RAW, I found that the biggest bottleneck for editing RAW was how much RAM I had, not my CPU speed. I upgraded my workstation from 4GB of RAM to 20GB, and RAW processing became orders of magnitude faster.

Oh, I agree that more RAM would also help, but we're talking about an ARM based machine. I'd open the task manager and watch the CPU be pegged at 100% for very long periods. Multitasking by running Xbox music & browsing the web at the same time slows things down quite a bit too. But again, it is a $350 device that weighs a 1 1/2 pounds and gets 8 hour battery life - so it can't have everything.

Also, a very little touted aspect is that Windows RT has yet to be any trojans/viruses on the market that'll fark with the OS. It's a perfect device to browse anything and everything on the web. A pron machine, if you will.

I think the big problem is trying to find the right niche for RT. The problem is that the people using a tablet for content consumption and entertainment go Nexus or an iPad because those platforms has the apps, and the power users aren't happy with RT's limits so they spend a bit more and get a Pro or a similar x86 tablet. It fits just right for your needs, but for 90% of people it seems like it just doesn't QUITE do what they need as well as its competition. they close the app gap, I could see it doing better, but even as a mobile business machine it has the problem of there always being that ONE app you need that isn't there, or that printer that wont work because it needs a downloadable driver

In general Intel has been dragging their feet on micropower Intel-compatible processors, because it risks cannibalizing their high-end server market.

For years they've been selling people on the "bigger is better" view, yet many basic server tasks don't need a quad core 4 ghz processor. You don't need that for a Windows domain controller, for example. An office file server that simply shuffles data from a storage device to end users on the network doesn't need massive CPU power either.

The watt-sipping server-grade Intel Atom S1200 series with ECC memory support (important for servers) has been out now for nearly 9 months, yet it is extremely hard to find ANYONE using it for low cost microATX or nano-ITX do-it-yourself motherboards. SuperMicro is about the only company offering a microserver motherboard, and then only something like two models?